Social Psychology and Technological Innovation in a Business Method

According to Lewin (1948), a group can be defined as a totality based on interdependence. The common destiny, the goal, is both an expression and a product of this interdependence. Each group is characterized by peculiar, pliable dynamics.




How to make the most of these group dynamics? How to identify and reach the common goal?

Three key concepts:

  • understand the link between social processes and cognitive processes

  • take note of bias of behavior and stereotypes, to which no human being is immune

  • reflect the rules of construction


Confirmation bias: defined by Skinner (psychologist - 1953) as "cognitive dissonance", this bias involves the behavior that leads us to refer to those who are not only in agreement with us but feed and reinforce our convictions.

Group bias: When we are part of a group, the behavior trend is to believe that it is rich in success because of its own internal qualities, other than the low-value features of other surrounding groups.

Gabler's Fallacy Bias: Describes the tendency to interpret the present based on what happened in the past. It therefore triggers a vicious circle that, if in the negative form, can help lower the self-esteem and quality of the group.

Error Bias by Similarity or Contrast: In a group, a leader who has a strong self esteem will tend to involve individuals who are imitating him for behaviors and features; on the contrary, a leader with low self-esteem will reward those who will overcome their shortcomings.

Bias of the status quo: When the change scares, this bias entails fossilizing on decisions and positions taken in the past, with the consequence of instilling the conviction that a different approach can only worsen the current situation.

Negative bias: this is a dangerous distortion because it puts the negative and negative events in the foreground underestimating the positive ones that could act as leverage to solve the group's issues.

 So what are the consequences of behavior bias?

Social and cognitive processes, the object of study of social psychology, are closely linked to each other: each human being perceives the other, communicates with it, understands and influences it through a bag of thoughts, memories, feelings, teachings Which are a cultural and family heritage and that irreversibly change the actions.

In other words, we can say that the cognitive and social processes that influence us are distortions, prejudicial interpretations, stereotypes.

Lippmann introduced this concept in 1922, claiming that the process of knowledge is not filter-free but rather mediated by stereotypes, in turn related to the extent to which each of us perceives reality. These are ideas, representations, which sometimes can extend and see attributed certain characteristics to a whole group of people. It is well known how stereotypes are very personal and often misguided forms of judgment, however, prejudices are highly dependent on individual cultural background or personality, which is difficult to criticize for constructive purposes and in fact remain irreplaceable despite the introduction of new perspectives or knowledge. At this point, a short-circuit is created.


 Is it possible to set objective standards and to take actions free of prejudice or is it utopia?

The answer is surely yes, but only in the face of eroding strongly-rooted beliefs with great willpower or with a definite method. Stereotypes often degenerate into self-proclaimed prophecies, one of the known phenomena in social psychology (Merton has already dealt with them in the 1970s): they so much calcify our conviction to ask us in the person or situation to confirm - even Forced - of the stereotype we projected on them. And take note: sometimes these prophecies that are self-proclaimed are also directed by the people to themselves, causing rigidity and excessive inflexibility to the rest of the group. The Visual Connexion Methods puts the same question above, and to answer three steps identifying social and network dynamics, putting them at the service of business groups and work to make as much decisions as possible free from cognitive conditioning.

 How do you achieve this goal?

The Method retains the norm of interaction and action, building it completely new.


Thanks to the co-analysis, we disengage from our own perception and interpretation of reality and rely on a specially designed software for the actual big picture of the situation. Only at this point can the group proceed with the display.


In cohesive groups, common goals prevail over individual ones, and results are achieved in collaboration. According to the same principle, the Visual Connexion Method puts in field a participatory and proactive analysis. Status and hierarchies are suspended - as well as internal conflicts - depending on the good performance of the group, and a specific work method is provided, a step-by-step process to follow.


Applying an additive and non-disjunctive logic, it utilizes a communication network, a structure, circular and non-vertical, which is just the most effective to complete complex tasks. The problem is solved, the group can proceed with the definition of project timing and all related details.



AIMIT Manual Motivational Systems in clinical dialogue, (Liotti G., Monticelli F.)

- Milano : Raffaello Cortina, 2008 IT\ICCU\MIL\0758528

The role of brain emotional systems in addictions: a neuro-evolutionary perspective and new ‘self-report’ animal model - Jaak Panksepp1 , Brian Knutson2 & Jeff Burgdorf

- Submitted 1 November 2000; initial review completed 22 February 2001; final version accepted 6 August 2001

The Archaeology of Mind: Neuroevolutionary Origins of Human Emotions (Norton Series on Interpersonal Neurobiology) Hardcover – September 17, 2012 - by Jaak Panksepp  (Author), Lucy Biven (Author)